| Index: chrome/browser/extensions/api/messaging/message_service.cc
|
| diff --git a/chrome/browser/extensions/api/messaging/message_service.cc b/chrome/browser/extensions/api/messaging/message_service.cc
|
| index 5b4c3829bff7839f33c2214405d12a301177a635..768cb40acd4f590a0ed79a3c94d959b29cffab65 100644
|
| --- a/chrome/browser/extensions/api/messaging/message_service.cc
|
| +++ b/chrome/browser/extensions/api/messaging/message_service.cc
|
| @@ -594,26 +594,12 @@ void MessageService::OpenChannelImpl(BrowserContext* browser_context,
|
| channel->receiver.reset(params->receiver.release());
|
| AddChannel(std::move(channel_ptr), params->receiver_port_id);
|
|
|
| - // TODO(robwu): Could |guest_process_id| and |guest_render_frame_routing_id|
|
| - // be removed? In the past extension message routing was process-based, but
|
| - // now that extensions are routed from a specific RFH, the special casing for
|
| - // guest views seems no longer necessary, because the ExtensionMessagePort can
|
| - // simply obtain the source process & frame ID directly from the RFH.
|
| - int guest_process_id = content::ChildProcessHost::kInvalidUniqueID;
|
| - int guest_render_frame_routing_id = MSG_ROUTING_NONE;
|
| - if (params->include_guest_process_info) {
|
| - guest_process_id = params->source_process_id;
|
| - guest_render_frame_routing_id = params->source_routing_id;
|
| -
|
| - DCHECK(WebViewGuest::FromWebContents(
|
| - WebContents::FromRenderFrameHost(source)));
|
| - }
|
| -
|
| // Send the connect event to the receiver. Give it the opener's port ID (the
|
| // opener has the opposite port ID).
|
| channel->receiver->DispatchOnConnect(
|
| params->channel_name, std::move(params->source_tab),
|
| - params->source_frame_id, guest_process_id, guest_render_frame_routing_id,
|
| + params->source_frame_id, params->include_guest_process_info,
|
| + params->source_process_id, params->source_routing_id,
|
| params->source_extension_id, params->target_extension_id,
|
| params->source_url, params->tls_channel_id);
|
|
|
|
|